Communists" to contest elections while under detention "so that the people will have a chance of disowning them"! The Kerala voters have given a fitting reply to Nanda.
The Congress party might still make a bid to seek coalition with the rebel Congressmen but even then, the-two parties together will not be in a position to command an absolute majority in the Assembly. It remains to be seen whether the Central government will release the Left Communists so that they can explore the: possibility of forming a ministry. This is going to be the crucial test for bourgeois democratic institutions in India.
Refusal by New Delhi to release the elected vezi siators still
under detention will certainly be interpreted as a serious challenge to the popular verdict expressed in the Kerala poll.
Namboodiripad, who headed the Communist ministry till it was dismissed by the Central government in 1961, said soon after his election was-announced: "I am grateful to the voters of my constituency who have seen through and defeated the disrupting game played
~ on Gam
by the Dangeites. I shall have the opportunity to congratulate the voters of Kerala for defeating the game played by the Congress, partioularly by the Home Minister Shri G.L.Nanda."
Namboodiripad was elected to the Assembly from his home constituency Pattambi where he was confronted with a four-cornered contest.
These are some of the highlights of the elections in Kerala:
K. Aniruddhan, a Left Communist prisoner, defeated the former Chief Minister R. Shanker in Attingal, considered to be the stronghold of the Congress. 7 In Kottayam another Lett Communist detenu M.K.George defeated
a former Congress minister M.P.Govindan Nair.
Other Left Communist leaders (still under detention) elected included P.R. Gopalan and Mrs. Gouri Thomas (both ministers in the former Namboodifipad cabinet), C.H.Kanaran and Mrs. Susheela Gopalan (wife of A.K.Gopalan, the detained leader of the Left CPI group in parliament).
T.V.Thomas, a Rightist Communist (husband of Gouri Thomas and a minister in the CPI-led government), was, however, defeated. V.R.Krishna Iyer, also a minister in the former Communist ministry, supported by the Right CPI, lost his deposit in the contest against a Left Communist. Other Rightist CPI tops did not contest.
No comment was immediately available from the Right CPI leaders about their debacle in Kerala, S.A.Dange, chairman, and C. Rajeshwar Rao, general secretary of the party, were away at Moscow attending the "consultative" meeting of international Communist leaders. It is, however, clear that the masses in Kerala, the most literate state in India, “have rejected the “middle of the *poaa" (class collaborationist ) policies of the Dangeite opportunists and have voted for the militant class struggle programme of the Left> CPI without being intimidated by the mass arrests of its leaders,
The bourgeois Congress party has also been rejected by the people and the "China Bogey" raised by Congressmen to scare the voters away from the Left CPI has boomeranged. The bourgeois © leadership is facing a dilemma whether to release the Left CPI leaders or take steps to wind up the democratic institutions. There is a move to once again dissolve the state legislature and impose "President's Rule™ on the state on the plea that none of the political parties has a stable majority in the new Assembly.
In any case, the situation in Kerala will precipitate a major political crisis in the country in the next few weeks.
SPANISH STUDENTS GAIN CONCESSIONS.
Some 4,000 students at the University of Madrid held a meeting of their newly constituted "Assembly of Free Students" March 1. ~After electing a leadership, they set aside March 2 as the "Day of the Free Student" and decided on a demonstration in the plaza before the office of the national minister of education. [See World Outlook March 5.]
The initiative taken by the Madrid students met with a response from other students throughout Spain. In Bilbao, for in-.stance, 12,000 students in various colleges and technical schools decided to go out on strike March 2 in token of solidarity. In Barcelona all the colleges and technical schools outside the official student union declared a solidarity strike to last from two to eight days. In Valencia close to 1,000 students met in the philosophy department under the chairmanship of Professor Carlos Paris El Garrido in the university's first "free assembly." In-Grenada the university authorities themselves suspended school "because of the currently existing tension." In Sevilla a demonstration.of more than 1,000 students shouted for a free union. They were dispersed by the police but no arrests were made. In Salamanca another student demonstration on its way to. the city hall was blocked.by the police. The University of Cadiz also went out on strike. In Zaragoza a "free assembly" was held. At Valladolid and Oviedo the schools of commerce joined in strike action.
The students registered in the ‘affected schools represent about eighty per cent of the entire university student population in Spain. . .
. The main test on March 2 camé, as expected, in Madrid. Heavy contingents of police were mobilized to meet the students. -Some 5,000 joined in the demonstration, which lasted for more than two hours in the cold and snow. In accordance with the decision of the "free assembly" the day before, they demonstrated in silence, carefully avoiding violence.
Moving in with clubs, the police sought to prevent the students from assembling in Cibeles Plaza. At a signal from a bugle they charged with particular violence in front of the offices of Agence France Presse which are located close to the plaza. Many priests participated in the demonstration and some forty of them were added to those arrested.
In sign of their anger over lying stories printed in the official press about their actions, the students tore up stacks of the daily papers, littering the streets.
In face of this demonstration and the wave of solidarity ctions throughout the country, the fascist regime decided that it was wise to make a retreat.
-lle
On March 3 the rector of the University of Madrid, Gutierrez Rios, whose arbitrary decision to cut off a series of lectures had precipitated the student struggle, announced that the schools of medicine, philosophy and letters would be reopened the following day. He gave as his reason "the petitions Formulated in writing by the professors and student representatives."
In doing this, the rector by-passed the SEU [Sindicato Espanol Universitario], thus dealing the official fascist union a body blow.
Meeting on March 3, the "free assembly" scheduled a session for two days later to draw up a draft program to be submitted for elaboration to various university centers.
Another concession came on March 4. In an unheard of move in fascist Spain, the press published a letter from students and professors that not only talked about the struggles between the students and the police but which "protested against the publication of a note that did not objectively reflect the reality of the facts." This was a direct reference to a note from the Ministry of Information which had been published in the whole Spanish press concerning the incidents of February 24,
Five professors were reported to be studying the basis for a new union to. replace the UEC which is now only a handicap and em= barrassment to the Franco regime,
On March 5 the Catholic publication Ya gave a detailed report of the strikes and assemblies that had occurred the previous day in Spain. The Madrid dailies published a press release that even included the names of student delegates under arrest.
In the "free assembly" meeting that day in Madrid, more than 5,000 students attended, The next meeting was scheduled for March 9 to hear a report on "conversations with the authorities,"
The meeting demanded reinstatement of five suspended professors. and the withdrawal of sanctions against a number of students. They gave the rector until March 9 to grant their demands.
The arrest of Garcia Calvo, the young professor who chaired the first meetings of the "free assembly," could create fresh friction. He is being held incommunicado.
Through their militant action, the Spanish students have succeeded in gaining some important concessions. It remains to be seen what Franco will do. He is an old hand at the cateand-mouse game and may now count on reprisals directed against the student leaders. In the present climate, however, this could prove to be a costly mistake,
BERTRAND RUSSELL ASSAILS WILSON FOR ABETTING WAR IN VIETNAM
In a speech at the London School of Economics February: 15, Bertrand Russell pitterly assailed the foreign policy of the Wilson government as a “betrayal” of all its election promises. The eminent philosopher and pacifist criticized Wilson most harshly for his policies in Vietnam, the Congo and Malaysia.
Russell began by citing the promises of the Labour leaders relating to disarmament. He then examined the record since they took office and showed that not a single promise has been honored. Instead they have continued the policies of the Tory government in this field. He then turned to the most dangerous world areas:
"You doubtless know a good deal about the war in South Vietnam, but I will give a very brief outline of its progress and character, South Vietnam was part of French Cochin-China, but after a long pro-= cess of civil war, the French were excluded from the whole region. A Conference was summoned to meet at Geneva in 1954, The conclusions reached were sensible, and, if they had been carried out, no trouble would have arisen. Vietnam was to be independent and neutral, and was to have a parliamentary government established by a General Election. The Americans did not like this. They professed to suspect that Vietnam would become part of the Communist bloc if left to itself and that North Vietnam was already,. and has continued to ‘be, part of the Communist bloc, in spite of reiterated statements by the Government of North Vietnam that they are and wish to be neutral.
"The Americans sent observers who decided that South Vietnam was too disturbed for a general election. There were in South Vietnam three parties: the peasants, who constituted the large majority; the Buddhists; and a tiny minority of Christians, who had been supporters of the French. The Americans decided to support this small faction. They did so at first by sending technical aid and material and 'Advisers.' It was soon seen, however, that the 'Advisers' were taking far more than a passive part in the war that ensued between the American-supported minority and the Buddhists and peasants. The war has continued now for many years and the American-supported Government -- or, more outspokenly, the Americans have steadily lost ground. It has been warfare of an incredibly brutal kind, brutal to a degree seldom equalled by any civilised Power.
"Hight million people have been put in barbed wire concentration camps involving forced labour. The country -- civilians, animals and crops as well as warriors and jungle -- has been sprayed with jelly gasoline and poison chemicals. Fifty thousand villages were burnt in 1962 alone.
"The following account was published in the Dallas Morning News on January 1, 1965: ‘Supposedly the purpose of the fortified
ages is to keep the Vietcong out. But barbed wire denies en-
trance and exit. Vietnamese farmers are forced at gunpoint into these virtual concentration camps. Their homes, possessions and crops are burned. In the province of Kien-Tuong, seven villagers were led into the town square. Their stomachs were slashed, their livers extracted and put on display. These victims were women and children, In another village, expectant mothers were invited to the square by Government forces to be honoured. Their stomachs were ripped open and their unborn babies removed,!
"and the anti-Communist Democratic Party of Vietnam told the International Control Commission that: 'Decapitation, eviscerations and the public display of murdered women and children are common,!
"It is, a8 | the Nation of January 19, 1963, called it, "a dirty, cruel war,' and one can only agree with the leader of the Vietnamese Democvatie Party when he said in an interview on C.B.S.
(reported in the Vietnamese Democratic Bulletin for September, 1963): 'It is certainly an ironic way to protect the peasant masses from Communism, !
"Tt is generally admitted that there is no hope that the Americans can win this war. Obviously failing. in South Vietnam, they are now considering extending the war to North Vietnam in. spite of the fact that China has declared its support of Vietnam if that should happen, and Russia may.follow suit.
"The Labour Party had,. hitherto, been opposed to this. policy which involves. .the risk of world war. As late as June 4, 1964, the Daily Worker said that Mr, Wilson, at the end of talks in Moscow, was opposed to carrying the war into North Vietnam as well as to North Vietnamese infiltration into the South. But, since the formation of his Gevernment, the Labour Party has agreed with America to support that country in its war of conquest. The Guardian reports on December 10, 1964, that. Mr. Wilson told President Johnson that Britain wholly’ supported the tegitimate role the United States is playing in South Vietnam,
"The Labour Government is ‘doing this in spite of the fact that the vast majority of the inhabitants of South Vietnam are opposed to this American war and want to achieve peace and neutrality -as the North Vietnamese have repeatedly asserted that they also wish -- and in spite of the extreme unparalleled brutality of the war and in spite of the fact -- and this is to be noted -- that the. Americans have no shred of right in South Vietnam and are conducting a war of a type to which the Labour Party has always been passionately opposed. Moreover, if the Americans extend the war to North Vietnam, as they threaten to do, we and they will be involved in a war with China of which the consequences are bound. to be horrible -- possibly all-out nuclear war. For all these consequences, the Labour Government will share the responsibility." | .
Russell continues with an equally. damning indictment of
American=-Belgian policy in the Congo and the shéemeful role of the Wilson government in assisting them.
"Similar troubles are being stirred up by ‘British initiative in the war’ between Malaysia and Indonesia," he continued, "a war likely to be as bloody and atrocious as the two of which I have been’ speaking and to last as long, with no victory possible." —
And these are not the only places "where the Labour Government is supporting Western imperialism." Russell pointed to British Guiana, Aden and the South Arabian Protectorates where "it is following the policies of the Tory Government. .."
NAll these are shameful attempts to support the tottering supremacy Of Britain and America against the wishes of the popula-tions -.concerned, and against the vast movement for independence which is agitating formerly subject peoples. It is a terrible fact that the Labour Government is supporting these hopeless and cruel attempts at subjugation. It is an almost worse fact that it is running the risk for us of these wars escalating to large nuclear wars.
"Its reception of China's overtures towards peace and disarmament is a dreary pointer to its attitude. Soon after the Labour Government took office, Premier Chou En-lai-wrote to our Prime Minister proposing that the governments.of the: world should undertake not to use nuclear weapons, and suggesting a summit conference. Mr. Wilson replied: 'I do not believe the procedure you have suggested is the best way to make progress. in-present circumstances.!. . . In the past. few years the West has rebuffed. several overtures made by China towards nuclear disarmament and denuclearised zones. If China is not included in disarmament discussions there is little hope for peace in the world. The Labour Government might have taken -- might still take -- a new and more realistic attitude, taking the promises of the East, as well as the West, at face value, at least as a basis for discussion, until they have been proved. to be hollow. But our new Minister for Disarmament seems to be interested chiefly in how to — keep up our armed forces more cheaply than hitherto,"
The Labour Government, Russell pointed out, "has done nothing apparent to implement Labour's promises" in disarmament negotiations, the establishment of nuclear-free zones, the reduction of man-power and arms, the private sale of arms and a series of similar. items, Ft has directly broken-its promise about arms for South Africa: and opposition to the spread of nuclear arms, And it has increased the cold war tensions.
"What are we to think of this betrayal? Is it the result of | a kind of blackmail -owing to the parlous state of the economy and finances of the country? But, surely, those who were about to take office must have examined the economic and financial condition of the country and the extent of its dependence upon the United States, and made plans to carry out their promises with the results of their
examination in mind. Had they not the courage to attack their problems boldly -~- or, indeed, with the probable end-results of their actions in mind, realistically?
"What hope is there for Parliamentary democracy when the leaders of a Party, upon achieving office, act in direct contradiction to their electoral promises? Those Labour Party members who do not like treachery have hitherto kept quiet in the interests of unity. But what is the use of unity in evil? The cardinal virtues in gangs of criminals are unity and loyalty.
"Before we are committed irrevocably -- and we are rapidly being so committed -- to policies leading to disaster for ourselves and for all the inhabitants of the world, we should make known in unmistakable terms our abhorrence of present policies. To wait much longer will be to wait. too long. If the Labour Party is to regain any part of its former championship of vitally necessary reforms, those who voted for it on the. basis of its electoral Manifesto will have to. insist that the leading members of this present Government must lose hope of ever holding office again.
"Whatever they may have done or not done in regard to their pre-election promises, they have got us into, and propose to keep us in, at least two of the most cruel and useless wars that there have ever been == wars of extermination. Against this policy we must protest in every possible way." a .